Rocco wrote:They should trade all their stars for 3rd line players. Then BDFLDB can have a team of grinders just like he wants who will listen and aren't talented enough to deviate from his system.

Like most anything I ask you, I assume your answer to this question will be yet another entry in the ongoing series "Rocco's Persecution Complex", but what does BDFLD(an)B(ylsma) stand for? Best Damn Fourth Liner?

Benevolent Dictator for Life...

Ah, actually pretty clever, whoever came up with it because I'm sure it wasn't Rocco.

Sid, yes. Malkin, no. We've seen how Giroux changed this series with 3 shorthanded goals in 2 games. In my opinion and I've been watching hockey for a long time, if you take away those goals, the Penguins probably end up winning Game 2. Also, look at Zetterberg and what he did to us on that 5 on 3 in the 2008 finals.

Crosby is a complete player and he should be able to play in any situation. The fact that he's so good, so fast, and so smart and we don't every use him on the PK is a travesty.

As for Malkin, I don't know that he's cut out for penalty killing duty, and using both of them anyway is not good. You need to come out with your top guys after killing a penalty, so we still have Malkin and Neal. Using Crosby for the last 30, 40, even 50 seconds of every PK is something the Penguins need to do, because Sid is too good to not start killing penalties and scoring shorthanded goals.

Probably, because I'm not a fan of bringing back a coach of a team that implodes in spectacular fashion. 3 years in a row they've been the better team and lost, and their performance in a must-win game was sad and lacking of emotion. That has to fall on the coach on some level. I wouldn't make that decision the day the season ends though.

Only if Fitzgerald will take the position otherwise its pointless... its just making a change for the sake of making a change

It's really not a change for its own sake though. If this coach (and staff) can't win a round (or even look competitive) with one of the most talented rosters in the league, when will they? Bylsma isn't necessarily a bad coach, but his system is clearly not working.

Only if Fitzgerald will take the position otherwise its pointless... its just making a change for the sake of making a change

It's really not a change for its own sake though. If this coach (and staff) can't win a round (or even look competitive) with one of the most talented rosters in the league, when will they? Bylsma isn't necessarily a bad coach, but his system is clearly not working.

Okay, lets play this game. Pick any coach in the league and any system in the league.... do you really believe Hitchcock's trap would fit for this team? Or Tippet's? or Tort's system?

Only if Fitzgerald will take the position otherwise its pointless... its just making a change for the sake of making a change

It's really not a change for its own sake though. If this coach (and staff) can't win a round (or even look competitive) with one of the most talented rosters in the league, when will they? Bylsma isn't necessarily a bad coach, but his system is clearly not working.

Okay, lets play this game. Pick any coach in the league and any system in the league.... do you really believe Hitchcock's trap would fit for this team? Or Tippet's? or Tort's system?

I didn't think I was playing the "hire the new coach" game. As I said in another thread, the only way Byslma should be kept as coach into next season is if Lemieux and Shero don't find a better alternative. They don't even need a drastic systemic change, but they do need a coach who can instill some sense of defensive structure; it doesn't have to be a trap, since obviously they have a load of offensive talent.

The fact remains though, since the Cup win we've seen three years of Bylsma's system in the playoffs and the results have not been pretty. Last year of course has an asterisk due to injuries, but even so, if you're good enough to get a 3-1 series lead against a woefully inferior team, it's really not acceptable to blow it so royally at home.

Fast B wrote:I didn't think I was playing the "hire the new coach" game. As I said in another thread, the only way Byslma should be kept as coach into next season is if Lemieux and Shero don't find a better alternative. They don't even need a drastic systemic change, but they do need a coach who can instill some sense of defensive structure; it doesn't have to be a trap, since obviously they have a load of offensive talent.

The fact remains though, since the Cup win we've seen three years of Bylsma's system in the playoffs and the results have not been pretty. Last year of course has an asterisk due to injuries, but even so, if you're good enough to get a 3-1 series lead against a woefully inferior team, it's really not acceptable to blow it so royally at home.

I agree with you. However I think the extent of the changes that need to be made are barely anything more than:

MRandall25 wrote:Just felt like I should touch on a theme I saw over the last few pages:

"Crosby is one hit away from an early retirement".

Yeah, and so is pretty much every other player in the NHL. They and the GM's know this. If that's your reason for not wanting to keep Crosby long-term, then I don't know what to say except

Any player can develop concussion problems. Period. Everyone is susceptible in one way or another. That's the nature of the game.

This is true, but I think the Crosby situation is a little different. I'm not going to argue whether or not he had multiple concussions or if it was a neck injury. Fact remains, he dealt with a serious neurological trauma for over 15 months. This should concern you. And in context of what people are using the health discussion for, it's further complicated as we are talking picking between two elite players.

With what the NHL has become with head injuries and what we've seen in other athletes (Pat LaFontaine, Wayne Chrebet, etc), it's hard for me to not be skeptical regarding Sid's health down the road.

MRandall25 wrote:Just felt like I should touch on a theme I saw over the last few pages:

"Crosby is one hit away from an early retirement".

Yeah, and so is pretty much every other player in the NHL. They and the GM's know this. If that's your reason for not wanting to keep Crosby long-term, then I don't know what to say except

Any player can develop concussion problems. Period. Everyone is susceptible in one way or another. That's the nature of the game.

This is true, but I think the Crosby situation is a little different. I'm not going to argue whether or not he had multiple concussions or if it was a neck injury. Fact remains, he dealt with a serious neurological trauma for over 15 months. This should concern you. And in context of what people are using the health discussion for, it's further complicated as we are talking picking between two elite players.

With what the NHL has become with head injuries and what we've seen in other athletes (Pat LaFontaine, Wayne Chrebet, etc), it's hard for me to not be skeptical regarding Sid's health down the road.

I'm not even talking just head injuries. We've seen Malkin and Staal both go down with knee injuries, we saw how Pronger got sticked in the eye, which turned into (possibly) a career ending concussion...

Point is, there's a lot of risks players take in playing the game. They know the risk going in, so do the GM's. Ever player is susceptible to a concussion, a knee injury, a back injury, a torn groin, etc etc that could possibly end their career. Saying Crosby is more susceptible than, say, Pierre Marc Bouchard or other players who have had concussions is a stretch. Minny still pays Bouchard, last I checked.

Also, Sid is the least of our problems, just thought I'd throw that out there.